> We both agree>> There does not exist an m> such that the mth line> of L is coFIS with the diagonal> (here we interpret "There does> not exist" to mean "we cannot find").

And again you interpret as *the* diagonal the actual infinity of *all*its elements.

*Every* FIS of the diagonal is a line.What we cannot find is a last line and is a last FIS of the diagonal.*Both* are unfindable. Therefore it is highly biased to talk about*the* diagonal.>> Indeed if we throw findable in> we agee with a lot of stuff.>> There is no findable largest natural> number.>> There is no ball with a findable index> in the vase.

And there is no findable set of natural numbers (remember, we cannotuse "all natural numbers" and related sets) that would require morethan one line. Similarly there is no FIS of d that would require morethan one line. Since there is not more than every FIS of d and sincethere is every line we can only talk about every FIS and line: Forevery FIS of d there is a line of the list. And more is not in d.